B & Q - Paint falls from shelf onto clothes

PasturesNew

notanewuser wrote: »

Who dresses up to go to B&Q?!)

They might have been on the way to Aunty Mabel's 100th birthday party, and an appointment with the local newspaper/photographer.... and as B&Q was en-route (usually 20 miles away), they popped in to grab a fist full of colour charts for Aunty Mabel to choose colours they'll be decorating her living room in .....

peachyprice

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Would beat watching all those bloomin ice bucket videos!

At least it's all in a good cause (speaking a someone with a relative with ALS)

Country_Cousin

Stevie_Palimo wrote: »

If you had of put as much effort into either working or finding a job as you have this stupid thread that has been answered on many occasions up until now then you would not need the £170.00 back.


Sort yourself out will you and know when to quit.

Plain nasty - who says OP does not have a job or does not go to work. He just said he did not have £170 to spare to go out and buy new clothes.

Johnnytwostep

Stevie_Palimo wrote: »

If you had of put as much effort into either working or finding a job as you have this stupid thread that has been answered on many occasions up until now then you would not need the £170.00 back.


Sort yourself out will you and know when to quit.

Not another of the great unwashed work Dodgers trying to get us to pay so they don't have to work!!

powerful_Rogue

peachyprice wrote: »

At least it's all in a good cause (speaking a someone with a relative with ALS)

Totally off subject, but the point of the ice bucket challenge is if nominated, either to do the challenge or give a donation. Plus it appears a lot of the donations are not going to ALS, but McMilian which have jumped on the ice bucket bandwagon.

duchy

sainty43 wrote: »

1.) We have to spend £170 of our own money that we do not have before they refund us several weeks later. How do we buy these replacement clothes if we do not have £170 lying around? We are a young couple, we have rent, bills and food to buy and are lucky to have £20 left at the end of the month, let alone £170 laying about.

Yet have £170 to spend on ONE outfit that is only worn to go somewhere a bit on the dusty and grubby side.

A bloke might believe this .......a women - Nope

dacouch

sainty43 wrote: »

So she has to visit every 2nd hand and charity shop, until she finds a similar pair of boots, jeans, bag, jumper etc. She chose the clothes she was wearing due to the style, colours. brand etc. To find a like for like replacement would be impossible, so you are saying that she has to replace it with something she doesn't like, that's not like for like, because B&Q messed up? That doesn't make the least bit of sense.


I also think your betterment argument doesn't make sense. Any insurance company would replace a damaged item like for like with a new replacement, as the effort and expense of sourcing same age products would be huge!


If someone crashed into my car through no fault of my own, I wouldn't expect to have the parts replaced with 2nd hand parts and neither would many people.

Your example of how an Insurer settles a claim is not correct.

Home Insurers tend to settle household claims from their own clients under a "New for Old" basis. This is because their customer has paid for a contract for claims to be paid on this basis.

A Home Insurer dealing with a third party claim under a Home Insurance policy eg a visitor to the home was splashed with paint would settle a claim on an "Indemnity" basis. This means they deduct "Wear and Tear" from the settlement to take into account the age of the item.

You should note that civil law eg if you took this to court would also look for damages to be paid on an "Indemnity" basis and not a "New for Old" basis hence why Insurers dealing with third parties pay claims on an "Indeminity" basis as this is all they're legally obliged to pay.

Note up until about twenty years ago all Home policies settled all claims on an "Indemnty" basis. "New for Old" was brought in due to marketing and customers being prepared to pay extra for it.

A motor Insurer tends to work on the same basis but parts tend to use new parts due to the ease and cost of obtaining them even when dealing with a third party. An Insurer dealing with their own client (Whom they have a contract with) sometimes has a clause that they can use pattern and / or used parts.

A vehicle Insurer when paying a claim for a consumable part such as a tyre eg a part that has a specific life span may deduct "Betterment" from the cost of the new tyre. This is because they can only replace with a new tyre where as the old tyre may have been 50% through it's expected life thus a contribution of 50% from the customer / third party would normally be expected.

Your clothes which I assume are not brand new have been damaged, you've had use of the clothes and B&Q are proposing paying your claim at the new (New for old) price. A court of law would deem that "wear and tear" be deducted from the new cost of the clothes.

mountainofdebt

OP

Look it from B&Q's position.

They've offered you £100 and you can spend it on what you want.

Prove that you've replaced the items and you can have the cost of them

KatieDee

I would accept the £100...on the proviso that you get the CCTV footage of the paint falling on your girlfriend. Post it off to You've Been Framed for £250, the public get a chuckle and you will have more than the £170 you originally requested

Kesstra

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Credit card?

You seriously cannot scrape together £170 for a couple of weeks until you get reimbursed?

If not should you go around wearing £170 worth of clothes?

How do you know these clothes were not bought over the years or given as gifts.
I have a £50 coat. I didn't pay for it! I have a pair of £50 boots. I didn't pay for those either. There is £100 worth of clothing that has lasted me and will last me years. Better than primark any day (Sorry for those of you that shop there!)

Not exactly a helpful post is it!?

Not everyone has a credit card either. Not something I would suggest doing in any case.

To the OP: Sorry I can't help. If this was me I would take the cash and try and replace the items through Ebay to make the money stretch as far as possible.